banditti busters?

Posted on February 26, 2025 by SUMPTER

riding to the city of New Orleans (The Chicago Daily Tribune December 29, 1874)

Louisiana’s political affairs were still unsettled in the aftermath of the September 1874 Battle of Liberty Place, in which the white supremacist White League began an insurrection to take control of the state government. At that time federal troops put the insurrection down. In December 1874 President Grant sent General Philip Sheridan to Louisiana to investigate the situation and possibly take command of the Department of the Gulf. Sheridan made it to New Orleans a few days before the organization of the state legislature on January 4, 1875. On that day, even though they were outnumbered 52-50, Democrats attempted to take control of the assembly by installing five Democrats who had not been declared elected by the “Returning Board”. Affairs were confusing and chaotic. United States General Régis de Trobriand and a few soldiers arrived in the hall and eventually removed the five non-elected Democrats. The Democratic members then marched out of the assembly. General Sheridan assumed command of the Department of the Gulf on the night of January 4th after the events in the legislature. The next day he contacted Secretary of War William W. Belknap to suggest that the federal government declare White League ringleaders to be “banditti,” so they could be tried by military commission.

General de Trobriand during Civil War

“banditti” (Harper’s Weekly January 30, 1875)

Sheridan’s report: unparliamentary procedure (HW 1-23-1875)

_____________________________

The federal troop intervention in the state legislature and Sheridan’s banditti comments caused a major brouhaha throughout the country – north and south. Eric Foner has written that the public supported federal troops putting down the Liberty Place insurrection but opposed the military’s intervention in the state legislature on January 4th, which showed “the dangers posed by excessive federal interference in local affairs.” United States troops taking charge in the state assembly caused “more Northern opposition than any previous federal action in the South.” Citizens in Boston met “at Faneuil Hall to demand Sheridan’s removal” and praised the White League as “defenders of republican freedom.” Wendell Phillips was at that meeting. When he said President Grant should have the power to protect the interests of the freed slaves, the crowd hissed, laughed, and told him to sit down. Louisiana affairs “divided and embarrassed the Grant Administration.” Things settled down after a Congressional committee headed by William A. Wheeler from New York came up with a compromise in February – Republicans would control the Louisiana Senate, Democrats would get control of the lower house, and Republican Governor Kellogg, considered a usurper by the Democrats, would remain in office. The Louisiana problems led the Republican party to become more hands-off in the South.[1]

Here are a few clippings from reaction around the country. According to a page 1 headline in January 5, 1875 issue of The Memphis Daily Appeal, the January 4th incident was “the last straw.” The accompanying article detailed the events in the legislature. In it’s January 13, 1875 issue Richmond’s Daily Dispatch said more Republicans would oppose the Grant Administration’s handling of Louisiana if they weren’t afraid of strengthening the Democratic party. The paper was glad Sheridan had to explain his “banditti” comments and stated that “The White League is mainly composed of gentlemen superior in every civil virtue to Sheridan himself.”

The Memphis Daily Appeal January 5, 1875

Daily Dispatch January 13, 1875 page 2

Daily Dispatch January 13, 1875 page 2

Harper’s Weekly provided a lot of coverage and had much to say about the events in Louisiana. Louisiana Governor Kellogg did not have the constitutional right to use federal troops without the permission of the U.S. president and the governor could make the request only when the state legislature was not in session. The paper opposed any desperate policy ventures to reunite the Republican party or restore its prestige. A couple cartoons summarized President Grant’s January 13th message to Congress. (According to the front-page article in The Memphis Daily Appeal on January 5th, General De Trobriand first appeared in the hall by himself after Democrat L.A. Wiltz took over the speakership and the five extra Democrats were seated. During the swearing in ceremony the sergeants at arms tried to prevent Republicans from leaving the hall. “Several scuffles ensued, when, on motion of Mr. George DuPre, General De Trobriand was sent for, who cleared the lobby of the police and spectators at the speaker’s request.” About 15 minutes later the general returned with troops and two letters from Governor Kellogg requesting the troops to remove the members not validated by the Returning Board. After the removal L.A. Wiltz eloquently protested the federal interference.) Another cartoon printed a letter to the editors of the New York Tribune that seemed to support assassinating President Grant. Also, some Democrats and members of the White League were pushing back.

Harper’s criticizes Republicans (1-23-1875)

don’t try desperate ventures (1-23-1875)

Harper’s Weekly January 30, 1875 page 92

Grant explains Sheridan’s actions in New Orleans

fed troops good – depending

Harper’s Weekly January 30, 1875 p101

William A. Wheeler

Louisiana Compromise (HW 3-20-1875)

compromised (HW 2-13-1875)

Sheridan didn’t turn out to be a banditti buster. According to Eric Foner, in the same section of his book cited above, Grant sent Sheridan to Louisiana to “protect the colored voter in his rights,” and ordered Sheridan to use federal troops to keep Governor Kellogg in office and squelch the violence. Too much of the country didn’t like the events of January 4th and Sheridan’s baditti letter. General Sheridan got married on June 3, 1875. He and his wife moved to Washington, D.C.

Kellogg still governor

You can read more about Sheridan’s famous Ride during the Civil War at the National Park Service. French-born Régis de Trobriand was naturalized in 1861 and served in the Union army throughout the war. His brigade performed courageously at the Wheatfield during the Battle of Gettysburg. He fought in the Indian Wars, and in 1874 President Grant assigned him to New Orleans.
From the Library of Congress: the December 29, 1874 issue of The Chicago Daily Tribune; Régis de Trobriand; the Murder of Louisiana: “President Ulysses S. Grant and Congress turned a blind eye to the disputed 1872 election of carpetbagger William P. Kellogg as governor of Louisiana. In this scene Kellogg holds up the heart which he has just extracted from the body of the female figure of Louisiana, who is held stretched across an altar by two freedmen. Enthroned behind the altar sits Grant, holding a sword. His attorney general, George H. Williams, the winged demon perched behind him, directs his hand. At left three other leering officials watch the operation, while at right women representing various states look on in obvious distress. South Carolina, kneeling closest to the altar, is in chains.”
I got the stamp at the Wikipedia article about Philip Sheridan. That’s the reference for his marriage, along with the Harper’s Weekly cartoon. Most of Harper’s Weekly for 1874 is at HathiTrust.

Harper’s Weekly June 5, 1875

not easy in New Orleans


_____________________

  1. [1]Foner Eric, Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution, 1863-1877. New York: HarperPerenial ModernClassics, 2014. Page 554-555. ↩
Posted in 150 Years Ago, Postbellum Politics, Reconstruction, The Grant Administration | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

It’s over –

Posted on January 24, 2025 by SUMPTER

– Reconstruction in Alabama

big gain for the Democrats

Overall, the 1874 United States elections were a boon to the Democratic Party, especially in the House of Representatives where Republicans lost 92 seats and the Democrats gained a dominant majority: “The Panic of 1873, a series of scandals, and an unpopular Congressional pay raise all damaged the Republican Party’s brand. With the passage of the Reconstruction Amendments, the importance of the parties’ roles in the Civil War also receded in the minds of many. Though Republicans won governorships in Northern states such as Pennsylvania, the election increased Democratic power in the South, which it later dominated after the end of Reconstruction.”

Democrats did gain power in Alabama. Although there wasn’t an election for U.S. senator, the Democrats picked up four House seats and the Democratic gubernatorial candidate, George S. Houston, defeated David P. Lewis, the Republican incumbent. Historian Eric Foner has written that Alabama was the second black belt state (after Georgia) to be “redeemed” – after the 1874 election white Democrats dominated state politics well into the 20th century. Although the economic depression was a factor, Alabama Democrats made race the main issue of the 1874 campaign. For example, “Democrats harped particularly on the school integration clause of the pending [federal] Civil Rights Bill …” That bill divided black and white Republicans – the Republican convention nominated all whites for state offices, refused to endorse the Civil Rights Bill, and emphasized that the party did not support racial social equality or mixing the races in schools and accommodations. Democrats used violence and destruction to hinder the Republican campaign and reduce black turnout. The Election Massacre of 1874 disrupted black voting in the Barbour County towns of Eufaula and Spring Hill. Armed whites also prevented blacks from voting in Mobile. Black turnout was high, but the violence helped Democrats win in Barbour and six other black-majority counties. “With Democrats in control of the state offices and both houses of the General Assembly, Reconstruction in Alabama had come to an end.” [1]

The telegraph was working well 150 years ago. The day after the election Richmond’s Daily Dispatch knew the Democrats had a good election overall. It’s a little hard to make out, but the paper headlined “A Glorious Day for the Conservatives and Democrats,” “Glad Tidings From All Points of the Compass,” “Serious Riot in Alabama,” “Massachusetts Redeemed and Beast Butler Bottled,” etc. The front page had some reports from Eufaula. The next day the editors declared the election “The Popular Revolution” and thought the vote indicated support for the “superior race.” The editors also thought the election results would discourage General Grant from seeking a third presidential term, but he might just try anyway for the good of the country – “Caesarism” was one of the many issues in 1874. In its November 21, 1874 issue, Harper’s Weekly said President Grant should have made it clear that he wasn’t going to run again.

Eufaula – Daily Dispatch</em November 4, 1874

Election night excitement in DC (Daily Dispatch</em 11-4-1874 p2)

Popular Revolution – Daily Dispatch November 5, 1874 (page 2)

prophetic

Republican vote crashes

but Dems only have the House (Harper’s Weekly Dec. 5, 1874

Walter L. Fleming agreed with Eric Foner that the 1874 election ended Reconstruction in Alabama. In his 1905 Civil War and Reconstruction in Alabama he includes the 1874 election in a chapter called “The Overthrow of Reconstruction.” There were many factors involved in the campaign, but Democrats did make race the leading issue. Here is Fleming’s account of the election itself:
The Election of 1874
The election of 1874 passed off with less violence than was expected; in fact, it was quieter than any previous campaign. The Democrats were assured of success and had no desire to lose the fruits of victory on account of riots and disorder. So the responsible people strained every nerve to preserve the peace. A regiment of soldiers was scattered throughout the Black Belt and showed a disposition to neglect the affairs of the blacks. But here, in the counties where the numerous arrests had been made, the blacks voted in full strength. In fact, with few exceptions, both parties voted in full strength, and, as regards the counting of the votes, it was the fairest election since the negroes began to vote. There were instances in white counties of negroes being forced to vote for the Democrats, while in the Black Belt negro Democrats were mobbed and driven from the polls. But the negro Democrats resorted to expedients to get in their tickets. In one county where the Democratic tickets were smooth at the top and the negro tickets perforated, the Democrats prepared perforated tickets for negro Democrats which went unquestioned. In other places special tickets were printed for the use of negro Democrats with the picture of General Grant or of Spencer on them and these passed the hurried Radical inspection and were cast for the Democrats. In Marengo County the Democrats purchased a Republican candidate, who agreed for $300 that he would not be elected. By his “sign of the button,” sent out among the negroes, the latter were instructed to vote a certain colored ticket which did not conform to law and hence was not counted. Other candidates agreed not to qualify after election, thus leaving the appointment to the governor.
In the Black Belt, now as before, the negroes were marshalled in regiments of 300 to 1500 under men who wrote orders purporting to be signed by General Grant, directing the negroes to vote for him. In Greene County 1400 uniformed negroes took possession of the polls, and excluded the few whites. A riot in Mobile was brought on by the close supervision over election affairs, which was objected to by a drunken negro who wanted to vote twice, and who declared that he wanted “to wade in blood up to his boot tops.” The negro was killed. A conflict at Belmont, where a negro was killed, and another at Gainesville were probably caused by the endeavor of the whites to exclude negroes who had been imported from Mississippi. By rioting the Republicans had everything to gain and the Democrats everything to lose, and while it is impossible in most cases to ascertain which party fired the first shot or struck the first blow, the evidence is clear that the desperate Radical whites encouraged the blacks to violent conduct in order to cause collisions between the races and thus secure Federal interference. In Eufaula occurred the most serious riot of the Reconstruction period that occurred in Alabama. The negroes came armed and threatening to the polls, which were held by a Republican sheriff and forty Republican deputies. Judge Keils, a carpet-bagger, had advised the blacks to come to Eufaula to vote: “You go to town; there are several troops of Yankees there; these damned Democrats won’t shoot a frog. You come armed and do as you please.” The Democrats were glad to have the troops, who were disgusted with the intimidation work of the previous month. Order was kept until a negro tried to vote the Democratic ticket and was discovered and mobbed by other blacks. The whites tried to protect him and some negro fired a shot. Then the riot began. The few whites were heavily armed and the negroes also. The deputies, it was said, lost their heads and fired indiscriminately. When the fight was over it was found that ten whites were wounded, and four negroes killed and sixty wounded. The Federal troops came leisurely in after it was over, and surrounded the polls. The course of the Federal troops in Eufaula was much as it was elsewhere. They camped some distance from the polls, and when their aid was demanded by the Republicans the captain either directly refused to interfere, or consulted his orders or his telegrams or his law dictionary. At last he offered to notify the white men wanted by the marshal to meet the latter and be arrested. Another commander, who took possession of the polls in Opelika in order to prevent a riot, was censured by General McDowell, the department commander. The troops were weary of such work, and their orders from General McDowell were very vague. After the election, as was to be expected, an outcry arose from the Radicals that the troops had in every case failed to do their duty.
When the votes were counted, it appeared that the Democrats had triumphed. Houston had 107,118 votes to 93,928 for Lewis. Two years before Herndon (Democrat) had received 81,371 votes to 89,868 for Lewis. The presidential campaign in 1872 had assisted Lewis. Grant ran far ahead of the Radical state ticket. The legislature of 1874-1875 was to be composed as follows: Senate, 13 Republicans (of whom 6 were negroes) and 20 Democrats; House, 40 Republicans (of whom 29 were negroes) and 60 Democrats.
The whites were exceedingly pleased with their victory, while the Republicans took defeat as something expected. There were, of course, the usual charges of outrage, Ku Kluxism, and the intimidation of the negro vote, but these were fewer than ever before. There was considerable complaint that the Federal troops had sided always with the whites in the election troubles. The Republican leaders knew, of course, that for their own time at least Alabama was to remain in the hands of the whites. The blacks were surprisingly indifferent after they discovered that there was to be no return to slavery, so much so that many whites feared that their indifference masked some deep-laid scheme against the victors.
The heart of the Black Belt still remained under the rule of the carpet-bagger and the black. The Democratic state executive Committee considered that enough had been gained for one election, so it ordered that no whites should contest on technical grounds alone the offices in those black counties. Other methods gradually gave the Black Belt to the whites. No Democrat would now go on the bond of a Republican official and numbers were unable to make bond; their offices thus becoming vacant, the governor appointed Democrats. Others sold out to the whites, or neglected to make bond, or made bonds which were later condemned by grand juries. This resulted in many offices going to the whites, though most of them were still in the hands of the Republicans.
Houston’s two terms were devoted to setting affairs in order. The administration was painfully economical. Not a cent was spent beyond what was absolutely necessary. Numerous superfluous offices were cut off at once and salaries reduced. The question of the public debt was settled. To prevent future interference by Federal authorities the time for state elections was changed from November, the time of the Federal elections, to August, and this separation is still in force. The whites now demanded a new constitution. Their objections to the constitution of 1868 were numerous: it was forced upon the whites, who had no voice in framing it; it “reminds us of unparalleled wrongs”; it had not secured good government; it was a patchwork unsuited to the needs of the state; it had wrecked the credit of the state by allowing the indorsement of private corporations; it provided for a costly administration, especially for a complicated and unworkable school system which had destroyed the schools; there was no power of expansion for the judiciary; and above all, it was not legally adopted.
The Republicans declared against a new constitution as meant to destroy the school system, provide imprisonment for debt, abolish exemption from taxation, disfranchise and otherwise degrade the blacks. By a vote of 77,763 to 59,928, a convention was ordered by the people, and to it were elected 80 Democrats, 12 Republicans, and 7 Independents. A new constitution was framed and adopted in 1875. …

lost in ’74

winning Democrat

U.S. Troops posted all over the state

You can also read about the Election Riots of 1874 at Encyclopedia of Alabama. The article explains that there was “evidence of the disparity in eyewitness accounts” about whether or not blacks voting in Eufaula were armed. To back that up, Eric Foner wrote that the blacks were unarmed; one of the reports from Eufaula said the blacks were armed.
George S. Houston started quite a trend. Alabamans only elected Democrats for governor from 1874 until Republican H. Guy Hunt won in 1986. There is an article at Wikipedia about the Solid South with lots of maps and charts (including gubernatorial elections).
Wikipedia cites Party of the People: a History of the Democrats pp.244-245 for the quote in the top paragraph in this post. LaDale Winling’s House election map is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license. I haven’t made any changes. The map shows six Alabama districts; the state had two at-large districts. Six Democrats and two Republicans were elected.
Most of Harper’s Weekly for 1874 is at HathiTrust. I got the bottom picture on page 912 of the November 7, 1874 issue of Harper’s Weekly at Internet Archive. According to History that Thomas Nast cartoon was important for the adoption of the elephant as a symbol of the Republican party. The elephant was used for Republicans a couple times during the Civil War, “but the pachyderm didn’t start to take hold as a GOP symbol until Thomas Nast, who’s considered the father of the modern political cartoon, used it in an 1874 Harper’s Weekly cartoon.” “The Third-Term Panic” criticized Caesarism, and Nast returned to that theme and the elephant symbol for “Caught In A Trap” (above) in the November 21st issue. History says that Nast continued to use the symbol and by 1880 others were following along.
From the Library of Congress: Richmond’s Daily Dispatch – November 4 and November 5, 1874. The Alabama map and the pictures of Lewis and Houston are from the Fleming book.

Elephant as Republican symbol

  1. [1]Foner Eric, Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution, 1863-1877. New York: HarperPerenial ModernClassics, 2014. Page 552-553. ↩
Posted in 150 Years Ago, Aftermath, Reconstruction, Southern Society | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

rebirth again

Posted on January 1, 2025 by SUMPTER

Harper’s Weekly January 2, 1875

Harper’s Weekly January 9, 1875

________________________________________________________

Henry Wadsworth Longfellow wrote a poem that seems pertinent.

MIDNIGHT MASS FOR THE DYING YEAR

Yes, the Year is growing old,
And his eye is pale and bleared!
Death, with frosty hand and cold,
Plucks the old man by the beard,
Sorely, sorely!

The leaves are falling, falling,
Solemnly and slow;
Caw! caw! the rooks are calling,
It is a sound of woe,
A sound of woe!

Through woods and mountain passes
The winds, like anthems, roll;
They are chanting solemn masses,
Singing, “Pray for this poor soul,
Pray, pray!”

And the hooded clouds, like friars,
Tell their beads in drops of rain,
And patter their doleful prayers;
But their prayers are all in vain,
All in vain!

There he stands in the foul weather,
The foolish, fond Old Year,
Crowned with wild flowers and with heather,
Like weak, despised Lear,
A king, a king!

Then comes the summer-like day,
Bids the old man rejoice!
His joy! his last! O, the man gray
Loveth that ever-soft voice,
Gentle and low.

To the crimson woods he saith,
To the voice gentle and low
Of the soft air, like a daughter’s breath,
“Pray do not mock me so!
Do not laugh at me!”

And now the sweet day is dead;
Cold in his arms it lies;
No stain from its breath is spread
Over the glassy skies,
No mist or stain!

Then, too, the Old Year dieth,
And the forests utter a moan,
Like the voice of one who crieth
In the wilderness alone,
“Vex not his ghost!”

Then comes, with an awful roar,
Gathering and sounding on,
The storm-wind from Labrador,
The wind Euroclydon,
The storm-wind!

Howl! howl! and from the forest
Sweep the red leaves away!
Would, the sins that thou abhorrest,
O Soul! could thus decay,
And be swept away!

For there shall come a mightier blast,
There shall be a darker day;
And the stars, from heaven down-cast
Like red leaves be swept away!
Kyrie, eleyson!
Christe, eleyson!

King Lear

H. W. Longfellow

Father Time and Baby New Year from Frolic & Fun, 1897

repeat

I got Longfellow’s poem from The Complete Poetical Works of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow at Project Gutenberg. According to the Maine Historical Society’s Henry Wadsworth Longfellow website, the poem was published in 1839’s Voices of the Night. We can search for it. “Midnight Mass for the Dying Year” was a bit over my head and I’m no expert, but I’d have to say this poem isn’t quite as optimistic as “Christmas Bells”, which the National Park Service says was probably written in 1864 and first published in 1865. Longfellow was “preoccupied with his son’s convalescence and other demands of business” in December 1863. The son was severely wounded in November 1863 fighting for the Union during the Mine Run campaign.
One of the reasons I’m looking forward to 2025 is because it should be a good chance to look back into the past – way, way back, even more than 150 years. The original Erie Canal was completed in 1825. The bicentennial should be pretty interesting.
Harper’s Weekly 1875 is available at HathiTrust. The images above are on pages 1 and 32. From the Library of Congress: Edwin Forrest as King Lear, c1897; Longfellow, ca.1880; Currier & Ives c1876 greeting. The 1897 image of Father Time and baby New year is available at Wikimedia Commons
Happy new year (New York : Published by Currier & Ives, c1876.; LOC: https://www.loc.gov/item/2002695831/)

Happy 2025!

Posted in 150 Years Ago | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The death of Gerrit Smith

Posted on December 28, 2024 by SUMPTER

The well-known abolitionist Gerrit Smith died on December 28, 1874. Harper’s Weekly published a eulogy and brief biography in its January 16, 1875 issue:

philanthropist, abolitionist, social reformer

GERRIT SMITH.

THE active antislavery movement in this country began forty years ago, and it is not surprising that many of its most famous champions have already gone or are departing in a ripe and honorable age. GERRIT SMITH was one of that band of moral heroes, and he was also one of the few Americans who may be called public men although not in official position, and who have a signal and influential individuality. He was born seventy-seven years ago, and his long life, his great riches, and his admirable talents were devoted to the relief and elevation of the forlorn and friendless and oppressed, and in a large and generous sense to the service of humanity. He was essentially a noble man. His advocacy of reforms was so strenuous and uncompromising that he seemed often fanatical and impracticable, but his great heart so overflowed with goodness and sympathy that no one who knew him could be his enemy, and in Congress, where nobody was more radical or more positive, no one was more heartily liked, even by his bitterest opponents.

In all things he was perfectly independent. No American had the courage of his opinions more than he, and he never hesitated to say what he thought with incisive vigor. There was always a man behind his words, and that, a wise man tells us, is the secret of eloquence. Naturally he was not a bigoted partisan. He was more political than the Garrisonian Abolitionists, with whom he most truly fraternized, and more radical than the Republicans, with whom he generally acted. His profound conviction that the long inhumanity with which the negro has been treated in this country has left in him and in public opinion consequences which are not to be removed by any merely formal provision led him to the deepest distrust of the Democratic party, under whose ascendency the crime against human nature in this country was defended and strengthened, and made him regard the possibility of a Democratic restoration as a deplorable calamity, for the reason that it was the restoration of the traditions, tendencies, and spirit of class oppression.

His charity was immense, and like EZRA CORNELL, he made himself the steward of his riches as a trust for the needy. Toward his home in Peterborough suffering men and humane causes constantly turned, and found his hospitable door and heart and purse always open. He knew no sectarian lines, and did not regard a man’s belief, but his life. A brave, good, beneficent man, who lived not for ease and selfish ambition, but for duty and the general welfare, he was, with the exception of one illness, robust in health as he was stalwart in frame. Indeed, his largeness and manliness of nature were well shown in his lofty form and bearing.

GERRIT SMITH was one of the men whose service to this country was not inferior to that of the fathers of the Revolution. As the earlier patriots made the nation independent, their later brethren made it free and just. When GERRIT SMITH began to take an interest in public affairs it was doubtful whether the American republic would not soon end in a huge slave empire. There was no national flag in Christendom so disgraced as ours, for no other was prostituted to an internal slave-hunting which was worthy of Dahomey. Mr. SMITH was one of those whose voice did not spare the infamy and its abettors, and who by their courageous eloquence and action aroused the dormant heart and conscience of America, until the people threw off the tyranny which was destroying them. For his part in this great service his name will be cherished and honored; and if those who know with him the perils that still menace our peace can not think without sorrow that the noble heart and lion port and uncompromising conscience of GERRIT SMITH have now become only a memory, they will not forget that they are also an inspiration.

GERRIT SMITH.

This distinguished philanthropist, whose sudden death in this city on the 28th ult. awakened universal sorrow and regret, was born at Utica, in this State, on the 6th of March, 1797. He was educated at Hamilton College, under President AZEL BACKUS, graduating in 1818 with the highest honors. During his collegiate career he gained a high reputation as an orator as well as a student. After leaving college he married the daughter of President Backus, but she died within less than a year. He subsequently married the daughter of Colonel FITZHUGH, of Maryland, who survives him.

“uncompromising conscience”

His father was Judge PETER SMITH, a man of character and note in his day. In early life he was a partner in business with JOHN JACOB ASTOR. They had but little money, and kept a small shop in New York, where they dealt in furs. In summer they used to go up the Hudson to Albany on a sloop, and thence penetrate the interior of the State on foot, through forests, rivers, and swamps, to purchase the furs which the Indians had collected during the winter. These furs, with the assistance of the Indians, they would bring on their backs and in canoes to Albany, and thence transport them down the Hudson to New York. They continued several years in this business, accumulating a good deal of money, when they dissolved partnership. Mr. SMITH established his home in the interior of the State, and commenced buying lands on an extensive scale, until he counted his acres by hundreds of thousands. Years afterward, during the financial embarrassments of 1837, GERRIT SMITH applied to his father’s old partner for the loan of $250,000. It was granted without hesitation on his mere verbal promise to give mortgages on certain property. The mortgages were immediately executed, but, through the carelessness of the County Clerk, they were not forwarded, and several weeks afterward Mr. SMITH received a letter from Mr.Astor asking if he had forgotten to have them made out. All this time Mr. Astor had not held a scratch of the pen as security for this immense sum.

GERRIT SMITH was early placed in charge of his father’s business, and, while husbanding the original estate, gave his attention largely to land investments. His transactions were characterized by sagacity and foresight. He owned land at one time in fifty-six of the sixty counties in this State. In the northern part of New York he owned eight hundred thousand acres, all in one piece, known as “John Brown’s Tract.” Much of this immense tract was given away to negroes and other settlers, almost always with a little money to help them along.

Mr. SMITH had a fondness for legal studies, was well versed in the laws relating to real estate, and late in life applied for admission to the bar for the purpose of defending a poor friendless German accused of murder. He gained the case. From his youth he was a politician, though he held office but once in the course of his long life. In 1852 he was elected to Congress in the Madison and Oswego district, receiving a large majority over a popular candidate. He resigned his seat at the close of the first session. But though office-holding was not to his taste, he always took an active part in politics, acting first with the old Whig party and afterward with the Republicans. From his earliest youth he was a true friend to the oppressed and a stanch opponent of slavery. His home at Peterborough was the refuge of hundreds of fugitive slaves, whom he received, protected, and assisted in obtaining the means of living. He was, indeed, one of the most generous of men. No worthy applicant for relief was ever turned away empty-handed from his door. At his residence, which looked like the country-seat of an English nobleman, he exhibited an elegant and liberal hospitality.

During the war Mr. SMITH heartily supported the government in its efforts to suppress the rebellion, but he entertained no hostility toward the people of the South, and after the war joined with HORACE GREELEY in signing the bail bond of JEFFERSON DAVIS. He was at one time wrongfully accused of abetting JOHN BROWN’s wild scheme for revolutionizing the government by invading Virginia at the head of five white men and five negroes. Brown’s unhappy fate depressed him exceedingly, and for a little while so seriously affected his mind as to make a resort to the Utica Asylum a necessity. Under the treatment of Dr. GREY, he soon recovered fully.

At the time of his death Mr. SMITH was on a Christmas visit at the house of his nephew, General COCHRANE. He seemed to be in his usual health. On the morning of the 27th ult, he was stricken with apoplexy while dressing. He lingered until a little after noon the next day, when he passed away.

A 1957 history of New York State mentioned Gerrit Smith several times. The following is part of an overview of antebellum humanitarian reforms:

In this reform movement New York, particularly the upstate region, led the nation. No other section produced leaders of the caliber of Theodore Weld, Charles Finney, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Gerrit Smith, and the Tappan brothers in New York City. Probably the most irrepressible reformer was Gerrit Smith, whose career, like a seismograph, registered every tremor of the reform movement. Smith became interested as a young man in the benevolent societies, notably the Sunday School Union and the American Bible Society. Soon he branched out into temperance and abolition, the major concern of his adult life. But other reforms captured his fancy. He experimented with manual-training schools; he served as vice-president of the American Peace Society; he backed the crusade for women’s rights; he clamored against tobacco, secret societies, and British rule in Ireland.[1]

Smith is mentioned in The Underground Railroad from Slavery to Freedom: A comprehensive history (at Project Gutenberg): “Gerrit Smith, the famous philanthropist, kept open house for fugitives in a fine old mansion at Peterboro, New York. He was one of the prime movers in the organization of the Liberty party at Arcade, New York, in 1840, and was its candidate for the presidency in 1848 and in 1852. He was elected to Congress in 1853 and served one term. It is said that during the decade 1850 to 1860 he ‘aided habitually in the escape of fugitive slaves and paid the legal expenses of persons accused of infractions of the Fugitive Slave Law.'” The quote is from O. B. Frothingham, Life of Gerrit Smith; National Cyclopedia of American Biography, Vol. II, pp. 322, 323. I highlighted Peterborough in the map below. The map is from the Project Gutenberg book. The full map shows that the midwest had many more routes than central New York state.

Peterborough in yellow

According to Adirondack Almanack, the John Brown of John Brown’s tract is not the John Brown with the “wild scheme.” The Almanack only mentions 210,000 acres and nothing about Gerrit Smith. The National Park Service says, “As a philanthropist he gave away forty acres of Adirondack land in Northern New York to 3000 poor (and “temperate”) African Americans, to permit them to meet the requirements for voting, and in hopes of promoting self-sufficiency. He subsequently sold John Brown the land at North Elba, New York (where Brown is buried, near Lake Placid). The plan was for Brown’s family to help the new settlers to become productive farmers. Though much of the land was clearly unsuitable for farming, some lasting settlements were formed. In all it is estimated that Smith’s philanthropy reach $8 million before he died.”

According to New York History Net, Smith was implicated in John Brown’s Harper’s Ferry raid: “Though Smith and several of Brown’s other co-conspirators (The Secret Six) reportedly avoided knowledge of the specifics, there is little doubt that he was generally aware of, and helped to finance, Brown’s plans for anti-slavery action in Virginia.”

Gerrit Smith is a member of the National Abolition Hall of Fame at the National Abolition Hall of Fame and Museum.
I got volume 19 of Harper’s Weekly (1875) from HathiTrust. The Gerrit Smith articles are on pages 50 and 52.
From the Library of Congress: the photo of Gerrit Smith
  1. [1]Ellis, David M., James A. Frost, Harold C. Syrett, and Harry J. Carman. A Short History of New York State. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1957. Print. page 308.↩
Posted in 150 Years Ago, 150 Years Ago This Week | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Light show

Posted on December 25, 2024 by SUMPTER

“Oh come, let us worship and bow down;
Let us kneel before the Lord our Maker.”

Milky Way

Let there be light

Earth and Seas

joy to the world

lights

The bible verse is Psalm 95.6 (New King James Version)
From Wikipedia: Bartolomé Esteban Murillo’s painting Adoration of the Shepherds, c.1650; There is a link to the later painting (circa 1668) on the same subject, which is a thumbnail above; the two photographs of the earth taken during the Apollo 8 lunar mission from December 21–27, 1968 – “Earthrise was taken during lunar orbit, the other photo was taken about 30,000 kilometers from earth and South America is visible, you can hear the Christmas Eve broadcast from Apollo 8 to earth at the same link.
From the Library of Congress: Currier & Ives’ 1876 lithograph. From Free Images: Milky Way; snowy scene
Merry Christmas (New York : Published by Currier & Ives, 125 Nassau St., [1876])

to you and yours

Posted in World Culture | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

comin’ to town?

Posted on December 24, 2024 by SUMPTER

It wasn’t exactly a diptych. The plates were separated by a couple pages of text. But in its December 26, 1874 issue Harper’s Weekly did publish two full-page images on a related theme: would Santa Claus, née Saint Nicholas, arrive with his sleigh full of gifts on the night before Christmas?

child’s faith

he’s on the way

_______________________

Harper’s Weekly published a poem to accompany the second picture. Father Time would win the long drawn out war of advancing age, “But Santa Claus is king to-night.” At Christmas, Father Time should “Ring out the angels’ song again Of ‘peace on earth, good-will to men!'” So it appears that the child’s wait was worth it. And the same probably could be said for youngsters in Richmond, Virginia. In its December 25, 1874 issue the Daily Dispatch published a piece from one of its readers regarding the night after Christmas. The report must have been about an earlier year, but I’m going to assume that if Santa made it to Richmond in 1873, he’d probably return in ’74. To summarize the clipping – it seems that the children overindulged in the sugar plums and other sweets.

the night after

Father Time stymied

Ethiopian Orthodox diptych

dreams can true

Another Night After Christmas poem is at Project Gutenberg – “The Night Before Christmas and Other Popular Stories For Children” – a doctor tended to the sick kids. The December 26, 1874 issue of Harper’s Weekly is at HathiTrust along with the rest of the year. From the Library of Congress: the December 25, 1874 issue of Richmond’s Daily Dispatch – image 4 contains “The Night after Christmas;” the c1897 stereo “Dreaming of Santa Claus”; the image of Santa Claus and kids from the December 2, 1903 issue of Puck. From Wikipedia: a real diptych: “Ethiopian Orthodox wooden diptych of St. Mary and the infant Jesus with archangels above them. St. George appears on a white horse on the left. (Late 16th-early 17th century)”

they are believers

Posted in 150 Years Ago This Month, American Culture | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

let the good time roll

Posted on November 28, 2024 by SUMPTER

Are you ready for some jollification?

President Ulysses S. Grant’s sixth Thanksgiving Day proclamation (from Pilgrim Hall Museum):

THANKSGIVING DAY 1874

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA – A PROCLAMATION
We are reminded by the changing seasons that it is time to pause in our daily avocations and offer thanks to Almighty God for the mercies and abundance of the year which is drawing to a close. The blessings of free government continue to be vouchsafed to us; the earth has responded to the labor of the husbandman; the land has been free from pestilence; internal order is being maintained, and peace with other powers has prevailed.

It is fitting that at stated periods we should cease from our accustomed pursuits and from the turmoil of our daily lives and unite in thankfulness for the blessings of the past and in the cultivation of kindly feelings toward each other.

Now, therefore, recognizing these considerations, I, Ulysses S. Grant, President of the United States, do recommend to all citizens to assemble in their respective places of worship on Thursday, the 26th day of November next, and express their thanks for the mercy and favor of Almighty God, and, laying aside all political contentions and all secular occupations, to observe such day as a day of rest, thanksgiving, and praise.

In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.

Done at the city of Washington, this 27th day of October, A.D. 1874, and of the Independence of the United States of America the ninety-ninth.
U.S. GRANT

In its 1874 Thanksgiving Day issue The New York Herald seemed to be calling for a less formally religious Thanksgiving:

New York Herald November 26, 1874

If the turkey gobblers that regulate the domestic economy of every turkey household in the land, even where the female suffragists claim equal rights on the highest roosts, had much to say about what presidents and governors should and should not do, the American people would certainly never hear of a proclamation for a national Thanksgiving; but it so happens that as yet universal suffrage has not been made to apply to all the animal creation, and to-day, therefore, the big politicians can enjoy their Thanksgiving dinner without fear of being defeated at the next election by the solid turkey vote of the rural districts. In fact, to-day will be a day of much feasting and probably of some praying throughout the length and breadth of the Union; for it is undeniable that of late years Thanksgiving Day has come to be looked upon by the people generally as

A HOLIDAY OF MERRYMAKING

rather than a holy day set apart for the exclusive benefit of long-winded preachers who while delivering their sermons are all the time wondering within themselves whether the turkey is being overdone at home, and who once upon a time considered the day and all its appurtenances as a sort of special property of their own.

In the long ago New England alone celebrated a specified day in the year as a day of general thanksgiving, the people of the other States not considering it worth their while to go to church for any particular purpose more than once a week, but during the past few years Thanksgiving Day has become, next to New Year’s Day, the greatest and the most generally observed holiday of the whole year. Its religious character in the days of the Puritans made it as sacred in the eyes of the God-fearing followers of Bradford and his successors as Christmas Day has always been with the Catholics, and, indeed, if the statements of some chroniclers of the “truth and nothing but the truth” can be relied upon, one of the chief motives, if not the principal motive, which led to the establishment of the day as a religious holiday by the Puritans was to “deter the unwary from falling into the superstitious practices of the Papists,” one of which was the observance of the 25th of December as the day when the Saviour was born into the world. Be that as it may, Thanksgiving Day has a history peculiarly its own, and it may surprise

THE STRAIGHT LACED NEW ENGLANDERS

who may regard the merrymakings now deemed inseparable from a proper celebration of the day as so many unpardonable crimes, and who may cling to the notion that it should be a day of extra religious practices alone, to learn that the very first Thanksgiving Day in New England, of which there is record, was celebrated with all sorts of merrymakings – that in fact it took the celebrators over three days to get through with their jollifications. This thanksgiving took place, of course, in Massachusetts, when Bradford was the governor. It was in 1621. He and his had suffered much, and had worked hard in the fields and had prayed as hard as they had worked, and as a result they were blessed with a good harvest. So one day four men, by order of the Governor, were sent out on a shooting expedition, “so that after a special manner” they “might rejoice together” after they “had gathered of their labors.” In those days there must have been splendid shooting, for the four sportsmen succeeded in bagging enough game to last Bradford’s company almost a week.

It is true that it is recorded as historical fact that there was “a little help aside,” besides the game secured by the huntsmen, but as to whether this consisted of pâtés de foie gras venison steaks or quail on toast, the veracious historian preserves a most ominous silence, and this silence is all the more to be deplored in view of the circumstance which he relates that while the Governor and his friends were enjoying the feast they were visited by King Massasoit and ninety of his men, whom they entertained for three mortal days. The inevitable conclusion is that either the four men must have been Irish riflemen of some ancient Rigby school or the Indians had

VERY POOR APPETITES.

A bilious historian of the present day has cruelly suggested that “the little help aside” was a big demijohn of whiskey, but every one who knows anything knows that Massasoit was a Good Templar in his way and a member in good standing of the church, and that Bradford had no stomach for evil sports of any kind. Three years after this little festivity of the Bradford company their Thanksgiving occurred. It was unlike the first in many respects, for there is no mention made by the faithful chronicler, Winslow, of any extra religious services having been held by the company, whereas on the second occasion there was quite a revival. Instead of making too merry from the start the Governor issued a proclamation that the people should humble themselves before the Lord “by fasting and prayer.” This, by the way, was considered necessary, as the crops had been poor and a drought had prevailed. The fasting and praying had a good effect, it is said, and when the showers of rain came, as an answer from on high, the Governor appointed the day following the general wetting as a day of thanksgiving, when they “returned

GLORY, HONOR AND PRAISE,

with all thankfulness to God, who had dealt so graciously with them,” and feasted splendidly afterward.

It will thus be seen that the idea of some people now-a-days, that Thanksgiving Day, if observed strictly in accordance with the old time customs, ought to be a day of fasting and prayer to the exclusion of feasting is an erroneous one, and that the originators of the Thanksgiving Day practice took good care that there should be merrymaking and general jollification, even if they had to set a special day for it after the prayer and fasting was at an end. From Bradford’s time down the idea of one day in the year being designated as a day of thanksgiving was faithfully adhered to in New England, and gradually, in years, it became the custom of the governors of States, outside of New England, to call on the people of their respective States to meet in their cuurches [sic] on a certain fixed day and return thanks to God for His blessings during the year. It often happened, however, that the day was not the same in the various States, and, indeed, some States never knew what it was to have a Thanksgiving Day at all. But the war of the rebellion, which brought about so many changes, brought about a change in this particular, and since the year when President Lincoln issued his proclamation fixing a day which the people of “all the States” were requested to observe as a day of thanksgiving, the Governors, even of the New England States, have come to regard it as a national holiday instead of a local one, and only issue their proclamations after the President has issued his fixing upon the day to be observed.

As has already been said, Thanksgiving Day is now, with but one probable exception, the best observed holiday in the Union. This certainly not because of its religious character, for apart from the morning services held in the churches, as a matter of form more than anything else, it cannot be considered a religious day; but the secret of its universal observance lies in the fact that as year succeeds year it becomes more and more sacred in the eyes of the people as

A FAMILY FESTIVAL.

family festival 1845

What had been but the practice on Thanksgiving Day of a few families whose members were scattered during the greater part of the year, has become the practice of every family in the land – a day of reunion, when the grandfather and grandmother and their children and their children’s children meet under the same roof, and sit at the same table, and gather about the same fireside and thank God that He has allowed them, after the dreary separation of a long year, to gaze upon one another’s faces once again and to find that the love which bound them all so closely together in the long ago, when some were mere children, has only been made all the stronger and deeper by the separation itself. It is this feature of the day that makes it a holy one in the eyes of the great majority of the people, and it is this that makes the old and the young look forward to its coming every year with the longing of the child who, after being far away from home at school, sees the vacation draw within a few days of being at hand. And if there was nothing else that stamps the day with a holy impress, this custom of the gathering together of the family every year is of itself sufficient to make it a sacred day in the annals of the nation. Could anything be more beautiful, more wholesome in its effects than this yearly family reunion? We are but a nation of

RESPECTABLE VAGABONDS

at the best, and the ties of home bind us none too …

[… I can’t read the next few lines and I’m also jumping ahead]

… A custom, then, like this good one of the gathering together of all the family is a holy one, and the hold it has of late years taken upon

THE POPULAR HEART

must continue to grow stronger rather than weaker through the course of the time to come. To-day everywhere, from out the family reunions which will take place (and where will they not take place?), where the very old and the very young will meet for the first time; where the sons and daughters and grandchildren will assemble from far and near about the family table once more, there will go up from loving hearts thanks, sweeter in the sight of God than all the formal services of all the ministers in all the churches put together – the thanks of the young and aged in thousands of families blended in one unspoken prayer. …

The article goes on to mention that there will be “Dark Shadow” in homes where an empty chair signifies the death of a family member during the year, and the very poor will have nothing to be thankful for unless some of the rich help them out. Several charities will be working throughout the day to help those in need. There were many Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish services scheduled.

Home to Thanksgiving (by Currier & Ives, c.1867; LOC: http://www.loc.gov/item/2002695889/)

home for the holiday

The next day the Herald reviewed Thanksgiving in Gotham and surrounding areas (pages 6 and 7). There was plenty of family dinners with turkey. “In fact, the observance of the festivity was more general among all classes than ever before.” The paper reviewed the kindness at the charitable institutions and the sermons at many of the churches. Just like New York State’s Thanksgiving Day in 1860 Henry Ward Beecher conducted services at Plymouth Church in Brooklyn: “Mr. Beecher preached one of his characteristic discourses, in which comments on religion, politics and social life were so happily blended as to call forth demonstrative approval, that took the shape of applause and cheers from the audience.” There were also parades and merrymaking.
Apparently President Grant’s proclamation didn’t fall on deaf ears in Richmond, Virginia, even though Grant was one of the main actors coercing the rebel states back into the Union during the Civil War. According to the Daily Dispatch in its November 27, 1874 issue banks were closed, the Post Office had reduced hours, and there were several church services. The editors weren’t big fans of the holiday.

from page 1 Daily Dispatch 11-27-1874

from page 2 Daily Dispatch 11-27-1874

Edward Winslow’s 1624 Good Newes from New England (at Project Gutenberg) mentions the 1623 drought, the day of fasting and prayer, the rain afterwards, and the day of thanksgiving, but not a feast. The Herald wondered how the Pilgrims could feed so many Pilgrims and Wampanoag Indians for so long. Pilgrim Hall Museum quotes Edward Winslow from Mourt’s Relation about a possible explanation: “king Massasoit, with some ninety men, whom for three days we entertained and feasted, and they went out and killed five Deer, which they brought to the Plantation and bestowed on our Governor, and upon the Captain and others.” The Irish riflemen and the Rigby referenced an international shooting match between Ireland and the U.S. in September 1874.
In a blog post at the Library of Congress Monica Smith writes that there were several European thanksgiving celebrations in North America before the Pilgrims got here, but agrees with the Herald that the 1621 Pilgrim celebration was not religious: “The Pilgrims actually rejected the idea of public religious displays. Not only did they host a non-religious Thanksgiving feast (aside from saying grace), but records also indicate they spent three days with their Wampanoag visitors playing games, feasting on a wide range of food, and, yes, even drinking beer.”
I’m not from New England and I’m not a Puritan, at least I don’t think I am, but I found myself interested in an 1816 Thanksgiving Proclamation at the Library of Congress. It was called for the state of New Hampshire well before President Lincoln effectively nationalized the holiday. Governor William Plumer noted that there was a lot to be thankful but suggested that the 1916 harvest wasn’t as abundant as the year before because might have been trying to get New Hampshirites’ attention. He also wanted to make sure the people prayed for the general government – President, Congress, and all officers.

Good Newes from New England

William Plumer, 1806

“humble ourselves for our transgressions”

From the Library of Congress: Home to Thanksgiving by Currier & Ives c1867; Lydia Maria Child’s Thanksgiving song – read the rest of the song here; William Plumer, 1806; his 1816 Thanksgiving Proclamation

Happy Thanksgiving!

Posted in 150 Years Ago This Week, American Culture, American Society, Postbellum Society, The Grant Administration | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

blue, gray, khaki

Posted on November 11, 2024 by SUMPTER

Camp Hancock

After the United States entered World War I in 1917, Camp Hancock was built near Augusta, Georgia as a training site for U.S. troops. Camp Hancock was named after Civil War general and native Pennsylvanian Winfield Scott Hancock. According to Veteran Voices Military Research, “Camp Hancock was established in July 1917 to serve as a training camp for the Pennsylvania National Guard units who would comprise the 28th “Keystone” Infantry Division, which occupied the camp from August 1917 – May 1918. After the 28th Division embarked for Europe the camp established a machine gun training center. It served as a demobilization center from December 1918 – March 1919 when it was closed.”

About 53 years after the end of the Civil War and a few weeks after the armistice ending World War I, a meeting was held near or at the camp that honored Civil War veterans and current doughboys. From the December 11, 1918 issue of Trench and Camp:

Trench and Camp December 11, 1918

Colonel I. C. Wade, a distinguished member of the G. A. R. and Captain J. Rice Smith, equally distinguished as a cavalry officer in the Confederate army, were the chief speakers at the Y. M. C. A. meeting held in the Liberty Theater last Sunday afternoon at 3 o’clock. Colonel B. H. Teague, of Aiken, S.C was chairman, and performed his duties with rare charm. On the platform were thirty Confederate and a few Grand army veterans. Colonel Brandt, Major Scott and several other officers of the camp, together with a few chaplins [sic] and Y. M.C. A. officials. Madam Backlor, the soloist, sang “Consider and Hear Me,” beautifully, receiving marked applause. The Headquarters M. G. T. C. Band, Joseph Marra, leader, rendered excellent service.

Colonel Wade, who enlisted in the Union army as a drummer boy when only 13 years of age and who is now on the military staff of General Watson at whom he shot sixteen times in one battle in the Civil War, gave several personal anecdotes, some of which were quite startling, and declared his belief that chivalry had reached its climax of perpection [sic] in General Lee (Confederate), and General Howard (Federal).

Captain J. Rice Smith thrilled his audience with an address which in every respect measured up to a high oratorical standard. The beauty of rhetoric and passion of delivery enforced the noble thought that “God moves in a mysterious way his wonders to perform.” God, he said, was against slavery and in favor of the Union, and all the old Confederate soldiers can now welcome the Northern soldiers in love, glad that the war ended as it did.

Captain Smith said that his grandfather fought in the Revolutionary War, his father in the Mexican war, he himself in the Civil War, but that his son now in France, was in the biggest and the best war ever fought on this earth.

AJ Twiggs

The most dramatic event of the meeting was when Brigadier General A.J. Twiggs marshalled the old Confederate soldiers in solid array on the platform of the theater and had these veterans of the Civil War give the military salute to the young soldiers composing the audience.

Hardly had this been done when Colonel Brandt strode to the front and gave the order: “Attention!” “Salute!” The entire audience arose and saluted the old veterans while cheers and occasional “rebel yell’ showed their appreciation of this courtesy.

A flashlight photograph of the audience and platform was taken at the moment of salute.

At the conclusion of the meeting Mr. Ralph A. Tracy, the camp secretary, stated that other meetings of equal interest and value, might be expected every Sunday afternoon, to which the soldiers of Camp Hancock were invited. A 20-minute “drop-in” Bible class led by Dr. Camden M. Cobern, the camp religious work director, will hereafter follow each afternoon program.

living machine gun insignia

December 10, 1918 at Camp Hancock

YMCA Hut not at Camp Hancock

According to a Youtube video by the South Carolina Confederate Relic Room & Military Museum, Dr. Benjamin H. Teague joined Hampton’s Legion in 1863 when he was 17 years old. He participated in the war through Appomattox. He returned home ragged and emaciated at less 100 pounds. He worked as a dentist for 48 years in Aiken, South Carolina. He was very involved with the United Confederate Veterans as served for a time as the Commander. He was always a private in the Confederate army, so he would have been a colonel in the UCV per the article from Trench and Camp. He collected Civil War artifacts, many of which are at the SCCRRMM. The relic room also has other artifacts, including a piece of wood from the Merrimac and a ribbon of the “Girls of the 60’s,” an organization made up of Confederate women who supported South Carolina soldiers in World War I. Also, if you search for teague at The American Civil War Museum, you can find three relevant photographs.
One place you can read about the YMCA is Roads to the Great War, including an article about Dr. James Naismith’s work as a YMCA chaplain “over there.” More information about Camp Hancock is available at Augusta Magazine and

unidentified black troops World War I era

Father and son from Mississippi

GAR veteran and U.S. sailor

From the Library of Congress: Camp Hancock, c1918; the December 11, 1918 issue of Trench and Camp – more about the newspaper, Camp Hancock, and the Spanish flu outbreak at the camp here; the photograph of AJ Twiggs said to be between 1905 and 1945- I don’t know his role in the Civil War, but a document at facingsouth.org lists him as GEN. A.J. TWIGGS Com. East Ga. Brigade, U.C.V Augusta, Ga. – the document from about 1922 is concerned with the truth of history textbooks; YMCA Hut, Columbus Barracks between ca. 1915 and ca. 1920; Confederate veteran and son , “Photograph shows portrait of Confederate veteran James Monroe Fears with his son, Arch Franklin Fears, in uniform.”; the GAR veteran and American sailor unidentified in the photo – “Photograph shows portrait of Union veteran in G.A.R. uniform with medals and World War I sailor, probably grandfather and grandson.”; unidentified African American soldiersthe November 11, 1920 issue of the Grand Forks Herald;
From Wikipedia: living machine gun insignia at Camp Hancock on December 10, 1918
With gratitude and respect for veterans

commemoration 1920

Posted in Veterans, World War I | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

technoween

Posted on October 31, 2024 by SUMPTER

early adopter?

According to the Library of Congress, the above picture was created/published in 1909 or 1910. Since the Wright brothers’ first 59 second flight at Kitty Hawk occurred in December 1903, I’d call that witch an early adopter, at least by my standards. It seems I usually have to drag myself kicking and screaming to use new technology.
One of the mistakes I’ve made in my life was not taking the typing course available in high school. It wasn’t that I was rejecting new technology, I just didn’t think I’d ever need to type. Within a couple years I learned how foolish that idea was as I learned a lot about gobs and gobs of white-out and retyping whole pages or nearly full pages. Everyone makes mistakes, but I probably would have been more efficient if I had taken the typing course.
Besides, typewriters were not exactly new technology at the time. According to an article by Nick Yetto in Smithsonian (September/October 2023 page 34), typewriters first became available in the marketplace about one hundred years before I was in high school. In the late 1860’s Christopher Lathan Sholes and Carlos Glidden, (along with temporarily involved S.W. Soulé) began working on a machine to print numbers and letters on paper in Milwaukee. “The Sholes and Glidden typewriter came to market in 1874, manufactured by E. Remington & Sons, which was then expanding its offerings after a lucrative spell manufacturing firearms for the Union. Sold as the ‘Remington No. 1,’ it became the first commercially successful typewriter and influenced nearly every subsequent design.” That first model featured the QWERTY keyboard, which is still widely used.

“Sholes And Glidden Machine, 1873.
This Was the Model Shown by Densmore to the Remingtons Which Resulted in the Historic Typewriter Contract “

in Milwaukee

“First Typewriter”

Charles Vonley Oden explains in Evolution of the Typewriter (1917) that inventors had been working on possible typewriters for quite a while. In fact, in 1714 Englishman Henry Mill patented a writing machine but there aren’t any details of how it was engineered. During the first part of the 19th century inventors came up with features that were useful, but none of the machines were practical. In 1868 Sholes, Glidden, and Soulé were granted patent papers that caught the attention of inventor James Densmore, who invested in the company. Soon after this Glidden, and Soulé dropped out of the business. Densmore stressed the importance of testing the machines and seeking feedback from “interested outsiders.” Poor manufacturing facilities resulted in very crude machines. Around 1870 G.W.N. Yost became involved with the project. He stressed the importance of skilled manufacturing if the typewriter would ever be profitable. Their group sought and received the attention of the Remington company, which was well-known as a skilled manufacturer of firearms during the Civil War. Remington contracted to make 1,000 Sholes & Glidden typewriters. Remington “later secured control of the machine” and named it ‘Remington.'”
Mr. Oden goes on to write that in 1874 the Remington No. 1 was put in the marketplace. Although 400 were sold, many were returned “not only on account of imperfections they developed, but because the business world had not yet given the typewriter serious consideration.” “A typewritten letter often offended the recipient, who seemed to feel it was a reflection upon his intelligence and ability to read pen writing.” Efforts were made to popularize the typewriter including a “sham battle” between inventors to increase public consciousness of the machine. The sales agents also placed the typewriters with prominent firms and individuals, who were taught how to use the machines and try them out. The sales agents publicized endorsements from those who had been using the typewriters. For example, in March 1875 Mark Twain wrote something like an anti-endorsement – recipients of his typewritten letters always wrote back asking for details about the “curiosity-breeding little joker” he owned. In 1882 the firm Wyckoff, Seamans, & Benedict was formed for the purpose of selling the Remington typewriters. In 1886 the Remington company sold its typewriter business to the sales firm. “Thus the typewriter became an independent enterprise and its success assured.”

“THE FIRST COMMERCIAL TYPEWRITER
Model 1 Remington, Shop No. 1. “

“Keyboard Diagram—From the First Typewriter Catalogue”

“One of the Earliest Typewriter Advertisements.”

At Robert Messenger’s ozTypewriter you can read a whole lot about typewriters. A post about Jefferson Moody Clough, The Unsung “Typewriter Maker of Ilion,” “the man who deserves as much credit as anyone for the successful launch of the typewriter on July 1, 1874. It was under Clough’s supervision that E. Remington & Sons of Ilion, New York, was able to mass produce a marketable machine from the crudely-made early versions of the Sholes & Glidden.” As I’ve been learning about typewriters “collaboration” is a word that comes to mind. For example, in The Story of the Typewriter, 1873-1923, by the Herkimer County Historical Society, William K. Jenne is identified as another important at the Remington factory: “But the most notable personage among these men was William K. Jenne, and at this time the mantle passes from Sholes to Jenne, who became for many years the central figure in the history of the development of the typewriter on its mechanical side.”

Harper’s Weekly October 24, 1874

Harper’s Weekly June 26, 1875

Harper’s Weekly August 14, 1875

According to Consider the Source New York, “Remington’s [Civil] war contracts resulted in the production of 250,000 rifles, carbines, and revolvers. This rivaled Colt’s Patent Fire Arms Manufacturing Company factory for the most arms produced for the Union war effort. However, when the fighting ended in 1865, so did the government contracts.” Remington’s sewing machine business influenced the design of the first typewriter.

three Remington revolvers

You can read a blog post by Ellen Terrell about “that almost sentient mechanism” at the Library of Congress. Another informative blog is Type-Writer.org.
From the Library of Congress: Halloween ancient and modern from 1909 or 1910; Charles Vonley Oden’s Evolution of the Typewriter, 1917, the information above comes from page 8 and pages 19-26; First typewriter, between ca. 1915 and ca. 1920, the image does pretty much resemble the typewriter in the Smithsonian article; Union cavalryman A. J. Blue with the Remington revolvers.
I got volume 19 of Harper’s Weekly (1875) from HathiTrust. The 1874 Harper’s Weekly is also from HathiTrust here. From Project Gutenberg: Herkimer County Historical Society’s The Story of the Typewriter, 1873-1923, 1923, this includes the images of the 1873 machine, the first commercial model, the keyboard, and the advertisement- the ad sells the typewriter as a way for poor women to get good paying job, the book has much more information about Mark Twain’s adoption of the typewriter; the image of the kids with their Jack-o’-lanterns comes from 1919’s The Book of Hallowe’en by Ruth Edna Kelley (page 178)
From Wikipedia: Copyright © 2005 Sulfur’s photo of the Milwaukee County historical marker, which is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license – no changes made; the Sholes and Glidden typewriter‘ E. Remington and Sons

simpler technology

Posted in 150 Years Ago, Technology | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Dedicated

Posted on October 15, 2024 by SUMPTER

After Abraham Lincoln was assassinated his body was buried in Oak Ridge Cemetery in Springfield, Illinois. 150 years ago today a large monument at the Lincoln grave site was dedicated. In its October 24, 1874 issue Harper’s Weekly described the monument:

THE LINCOIN MONUMENT
AT SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS.

Harper’s Weekly October 24, 1874 p990

WE give on this page an illustration of the monument erected at Springfield, Illinois, in honor of President LINCOLN, which includes a bronze statue of the President modeled by Mr. LARKIN G. MEAD. The statue was put in its place on the 3d inst., and was formally unveiled on the 15th in the presence of a vast assemblage of people from all parts of the country. It stands on the south side and in front of the shaft, about thirty feet above the ground. President GRANT and many other distinguished guests, both civil and military, were present at the ceremony. The statue is an excellent and characteristic likeness of Mr. LINCOLN. The figure is represented as dressed in the double-breasted long frock-coat and the loose pantaloons which were the fashion ten or twelve years ago, and consequently make the form appear somewhat more full and robust than Mr. LINCOLN really was. The portraiture of the statue is realistic in its fidelity. The rather stooping shoulders, the forward inclination of the head, manner of wearing the hair, the protruding eyebrows, the nose, the mouth, with the prominent and slightly drooping lower lip, the mole on his left cheek, the eyes sitting far back in his head, the calm, earnest, half-sorrowful expression of the face, all recall to the minds of his old friends and neighbors the simple-mannered, unaffected man who lived among them until he was called away to enter upon the duties of Chief Magistrate of the nation.

As will be seen from our engraving, Mr. LINCOLN is represented with his left hand resting upon fasces, around which are gracefully folded the Stars and Stripes. Mr. LINCOLN is represented as having just signed the Proclamation of Emancipation, and in his left hand he holds a scroll marked “Proclamation;” in the right hand he holds a pen. The coat of arms upon the face of the pedestal on which the statue stands represents the American eagle standing upon a shield partly draped by the flag, with one foot upon a broken shackle, and in his beak the fragments of a chain which he has just broken to pieces.

The monument is constructed in the most substantial manner of Quincy granite. In the base are two chambers. The one shown in our engraving is called Memorial Hall, and contains some interesting relics of the late President. The other, on the north side, contains the caskets inclosing the remains of Mr. LINCOLN and his little son “Tad.” The opening above Memorial Hall is the entrance to the winding stairs leading to the top of the monument. The several subordinate groups of figures shown in our engraving are not yet placed in position. Each group is intended to represent a branch of the service of the United States.

The monument was erected under the superintendence of Mr. W.D. RICHARDSON, from the design of Mr. LARKIN G. MEAD. The base is seventy-four feet on each side and twenty high, the total height to the top of the shaft being one hundred and twenty feet. The structure cost $250,000.

In its October 16, 1874 issue The Chicago Daily Tribune covered the dedication ceremony. It was a major event with thousands in attendance. Even the generally quiet Ulysses S. Grant spoke a few prepared words. From page 2 of the newspaper:

SPEECH OF GEN. GRANT.

Gen. Grant was loudly called for and read the following address:

never revengeful

MR. CHAIRMAN, LADIES, AND GENTLEMEN: On an occasion like the present, I feel it a duty on my part to bear testimony to the great and good qualities of the patriotic man whose earthly remains now rest beneath this dedicated monument. It was not my fortune to make the acquaintance of Mr. Lincoln until the beginning of the last year of the great struggle for national existence. During those years of doubting and despondency among the many patriotic men of the country, Abraham Lincoln never for a moment doubted but that the final result would be in favor of peace, union, and freedom to every race in this broad land. His faith in an all-wide Providence directing our arms in this final result was the faith of the Christian that his Redeemer liveth. Amidst obloquy, personal abuse, and hate undisguised, and which was given vent to without restraint through the press, upon the stump, and in private circles, he remained the same staunch, unyielding servant of the people, never exhibiting a revengeful feeling towards his traducers, but he rather pitied them, and hoped, for their own sake and the good name of their posterity, that they might desist. For a single moment it did not occur to him that the man Lincoln was being assailed, but that a treasonable spirit, one willing to destroy the freest Government the sun ever shone upon, was giving vent to itself upon him as the Chief Executive of the nation, only because he was such Executive. As a lawyer in your midst, he would have avoided all this slander, for his life was a pure and simple one, and no doubt he would have been a much happier man; but who can tell what might have been the fate of the nation but for the pure, unselfish, and wise administration of a Lincoln? From March, 1864, to the day when the hand of an assassin opened a grave for Mr. Lincoln, then President of the United States, my personal relations with him were as close and intimate as the nature of our respective duties would permit. To know him personally was to love and respect him for his great qualities of heart and head, and for his patience and patriotism. With all his disappointments from failures on the part of those to whom he had intrusted command, and treachery on the part of those who had gained his confidence but to betray it, I never heard him utter a complaint, nor cast a censure for bad conduct or bad faith. It was his nature to find excuses for his adversaries. In his death, the nation lost its greatest hero. In his death, the South lost its most just friend.

The Chicago Daily Tribune October 16, 1874 page 1

1883, from Northeast

attempted theft of Lincoln’s remains in 1876

Larkin G. Meade

1883, from South side

last group (Cavalry) put in place March 1883

The Daily Tribune report included several notes from famous people who regretted not being able to attend the monument dedication. Many of these fought in the Civil War. For example, James Longstreet wrote from New Orleans, and Ambrose Burnside wrote from Chicago on October 14th – he was actually on his way to the ceremony when he found out he had to head back East right away.

__________

150 years ago there was talk of President Grant possibly running for a third team in 1876. The cover of the Harper’s Weekly October 24 issue featured a cartoon by Thomas Nast that suggested Grant might not be too pleased by the prospect. Columbia can’t bear to watch the president’s struggles.

Harper’s Weekly 10-24-1874

circa 1865

2005

The October 24, 1874 issue of Harper’s Weekly is at HathiTrust. David Jones 2005 photograph of Lincoln’s tomb is licensedunder the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 Generic license. I didn’t make any changes.
From the Library of Congress: The October 16, 1874 issue of The Chicago Daily Tribune; a portrait of President Lincoln – “Published in: Lincoln’s photographs: a complete album / by Lloyd Ostendorf. Dayton, OH: Rockywood Press, 1998, p. 160., “A crafty and determined president photographed by Lewis E. Walker, Washington, D.C., about 1863. Observe the almost casual attire, with the unbuttoned coat and the familiar watch chain hanging from the side pocket instead of the vest. The only personal ornament worn by Lincoln in any photograph is a watch chain. This heavy chain of hair-thin braided gold was presented to him in 1863 by a California delegation.”, “(Source: Ostendorf, p. 160)” I think the photographer is Lewis Emory Walker. There is a Lewis E. Walker from Western New York who owned a bookstore store and published stereographs; tomb 1883 from northeast with description; Larkin G. Meade; tomb 1883 from South with more detailed description than the Harper’s Weekly piece; James Longstreet; Ambrose E. Burnside Lincoln’s tomb, circa 1865.
Posted in 150 Years Ago This Week, Aftermath, Postbellum Society | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment